How much do you know about WWII battles?

[ovrszd]

^^^ Good point. Am I reading too much into it, or is the difference between the EM pledge and the officer's pledge worrisome?

As an Enlisted Soldier for 40 years with 42 months of it drawing Combat Pay I never once even considered the idea that I might be in a deadly situation and the President be present where that oath might be significant. If that situation did arise I would expect him to take up arms and join the fight. As the CSM in the movie "We were Soldiers" said when asked why he didn't carry a rifle, "If I need one there will be plenty of them lying around."

 

[Ken45101]

The way I read the differences in the oath, enlisted men swear to follow the orders of the President even if they are questionably unconstitutional and unlawful.

Officers are only sworn to uphold the Constitution and laws.

One example might be if the President declares the Second Amendment null and void and instructs the military to confiscate all civilian arms. Or if Obama declares there is too much domestic unrest and suspends the elections, leaving himself in office and orders the military to follow orders.

 

[ovrszd]

The way I read the differences in the oath, enlisted men swear to follow the orders of the President even if they are questionably unconstitutional and unlawful.

Officers are only sworn to uphold the Constitution and laws.

One example might be if the President declares the Second Amendment null and void and instructs the military to confiscate all civilian arms. Or if Obama declares there is too much domestic unrest and suspends the elections, leaving himself in office and orders the military to follow orders.

Good points of discussion.

So, if either of your scenarios played out, who is the Enlisted Soldier supposed to obey, his Superior Officers or the President??

As a First Sergeant I always accepted that it was my responsibility to complete the mission. It was my Commander's responsibility to ensure the mission was valid and legal.

 

[Ken45101]

As a First Sergeant I always accepted that it was my responsibility to complete the mission. It was my Commander's responsibility to ensure the mission was valid and legal.

Isn't that the "I was only following orders" response which the Nuremberg Trials said was not legitimate justification?

I know that the most publicity was given to the high ranking officers but I thought enlisted men were also found guilty.

 

[ovrszd]

Isn't that the "I was only following orders" response which the Nuremberg Trials said was not legitimate justification?

I know that the most publicity was given to the high ranking officers but I thought enlisted men were also found guilty.

Yeah, definitely not legitimate justification.

I tried to condense my statement, but I see now that might have been a mistake. I always analyzed my given mission for validity and moral necessity/legality. In the planning stages though, that's the Commander's responsibility. Those issues should be worked out and confirmed before it gets to me. It's then my responsibility to execute and complete in the most successful way. Once we have gotten to this point the President's presence, blessing or not, is pretty much irrelevant.

 

[Ken45101]

I was not thinking of the President physically present, that would be chaos. But rather written or verbal orders originating from the White House to do something you feel is either unconstitutional or morally wrong.

 

[ovrszd]

I was not thinking of the President physically present, that would be chaos. But rather written or verbal orders originating from the White House to do something you feel is either unconstitutional or morally wrong.

Aaaaahhhhh...... Now we finally arrive at the reason the Orders are written the way they are.

It's the Officer's obligation to guide and counsel the President to make appropriate decisions concerning his military. It's their responsibility to sort out the illegal, immoral, and invalid orders before they are issued to the Soldiers. With this safeguard in place it comes down to the Enlisted Soldiers completing the mission to never question the authority of the Presidential order. Thus the additional statement in their pledge. Agree??

 

[Garandman]

I was not thinking of the President physically present, that would be chaos. But rather written or verbal orders originating from the White House to do something you feel is either unconstitutional or morally wrong.

Oh, you mean stand idly by while an "ally" sexually abuses children?

You get kicked out for that.

 

[oldballs]

As a former EM (NCO)......I guess that I would stay with the code...or "Ours is not to reason why, ours is to do or die". However if a command was against my moral code (The Ten Commandments), I would renege. That's all easy to say without being in the "situation", without being 18 years old, weary and scared.

This discussion (off topic) is worthwhile however.

Cheers,
Mike

 

[ovrszd]

As a former EM (NCO)......I guess that I would stay with the code...or "Ours is not to reason why, ours is to do or die". However if a command was against my moral code (The Ten Commandments), I would renege. That's all easy to say without being in the "situation", without being 18 years old, weary and scared.

This discussion (off topic) is worthwhile however.

Cheers,
Mike

Well stated Mike.

I attended the Non-Commissioned Officer's Academy in Ft Benning Georgia in 1971. To do or die was our motto. I completely understood the need for such a motto. Six months later I got to exercise it repeatedly in Vietnam.

I also agree with your moral stance. The answer to that one comes instantly with your instincts. Anytime I've done something remotely immoral I've known it was at the time.

I was Drafted. They don't Draft 40 year olds. They Draft those that can be molded. 18 year olds.

Personal sidetrack here. We need the Draft now. We need a larger percentage of the young population to assume ownership of this nation and quit waiting on a handout.